[Changes of surgical interventions on necrotizing pancreatitis]

Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Oct 1;57(10):14-18. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2019.10.004.
[Article in Chinese]

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the changes of surgical invitations on necrotizing pancreatitis in recent 14 years by reviewing single center data. Methods: One thousand and eighty patients with necrotizing pancreatitis who received surgical invitation were involved in the study.All the patients were treated at Department of Pancreatic Surgery,Union Hospital,Tongji Medical College,Huazhong University of Science and Technology from January 2005 to December 2018. Six hundred and seventy-eight were males and 402 were females. The median (range) age of the study patients was 45 (20-76) years.The etiology of the disease was related to cholelithiasis in 335 cases(31.02%), hyperlipemia in 302 cases(27.96%), alcohol in 226 cases(20.93%), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in 28 cases(2.59%), pregnancy in 50 cases(4.63%), idiopathic factors in 72 cases(6.67%) and other causes in 67 cases(6.20%). The patients were divided into two groups according to the time of admission. Group 1 included 1 475 patients that admitted from January 2005 to December 2010, and group 2 included 1 539 patients that admitted from January 2011 to December 2018. The surgical interventions, morbidity and mortality of the two group were compared, and χ(2) test was used for the statistical test. Results: Two hundred and sixty-six among the 1 080 cases were treated with drainage procedures because of the pseudocyst.One hundred and seventy-five drainage procedures were performed between January 2005 and December 2018, which account for 11.87%(175 /1 475) of all patients of necrotizing pancreatitis; 91 drainage procedures were performed between January 2011 and December 2018,which account for 5.91%(91/1 539) of all patients of necrotizing pancreatitis. Eight hundred and fourteen cases received surgical intervention for infection of necrotizing tissues. Of these cases, 410 cases received percutaneous catheter drainage(PCD) of retroperitoneal fluid or residual infection. Debridement of necrotic tissues was performed on 756 cases. Of these cases, 32 cases received minimal invasive retroperitoneal debridement with/without denotes video assistant,4 cases received transluminal endoscopic debridement, 21 cases received laparoscopic debridement, and 709 cases received open laparotic debridement.Three hundred and sixty-five cases were admitted to our institute during January 2005 to December 2010, and the other 391 cases were admitted to our institute from January 2011 to December 2018. Of the first period, all debridement were performed with open laparotic procedures. Of the second period,debridement were performed with open laparotic procedures and minimal invasive procedures. The average times of surgical invasion, morbidity of principal local complications and mortality of the two periods were 1.27 and 1.34,28.22%(103/365) and 29.92%(117/346),and 6.03%(23/365) and 6.91%(27/346), respectively. Conclusions: Minimal invasive procedures can be considered for debridement in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis in some selected conditions.The involvements of minimal invasive procedures in treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis don't decrease the morbidity of principal local complications and mortality in recent years. Rational surgical procedures and appropriate surgical timing are the keys to improve the efficacy of necrotizing pancreatitis.

目的: 探讨近14年坏死性胰腺炎外科干预策略、治疗理念的变迁及其疗效。方法: 回顾性分析2005年1月至2018年12月于华中科技大学同济医学院附属协和医院胰腺外科进行外科干预的1 080例坏死性胰腺炎患者的临床资料。男性678例,女性402例;中位年龄45岁(范围:20~76岁);按病因分类,胆源性335例(31.02%)、高脂血症性302例(27.96%)、酒精性226例(20.93%)、经内镜逆行性胰胆管造影术后28例(2.59%)、妊娠50例(4.63%)、特发性72例(6.67%)、其他67例(6.20%)。按治疗时间将患者分为两个阶段:第一阶段(2005年1月至2010年12月)1 475例,第二阶段(2011年1月至2018年12月)1 539例。两个阶段患者所接受的外科干预方式及临床预后的比较采用χ(2)检验。结果: 1 080例患者中,因不合并感染的假性囊肿而行单纯内、外引流的患者266例。第一阶段共实施假性囊肿引流术175例,占所有坏死性胰腺炎患者的11.87%(175/1 475);第二阶段共实施假性囊肿引流术91例,占所有坏死性胰腺炎患者的5.91%(91/1 539)。814例患者因坏死感染而进行外科干预,其中行腹膜后经皮穿刺置管引流410例,行坏死组织清除术的756例,行腹膜后小切口(包括视频辅助)坏死组织清除术32例,经胃镜坏死组织清除术4例,腹腔镜辅助胰腺坏死组织清除术21例,开放坏死组织清除术709例。第一阶段接受坏死组织清除术者365例,第二阶段接受坏死组织清除术者391例。第一阶段均采用经腹腔开放手术的方式清除坏死组织,第二阶段采用开放、微创等多种方式清除坏死组织。第一阶段和第二阶段人均手术次数分别为1.27次和1.34次,局部并发症发生率分别为28.22%(103/365)和29.92%(117/346),病死率分别为6.03%(23/365)和6.91%(27/346),两阶段的局部并发症发生率与病死率的差异均无统计学意义(P值均>0.05)。结论: 微创和开放的方式治疗坏死性胰腺炎的效果相当。恰当的干预时机与正确选择坏死组织清除方式是保证胰腺坏死组织清除术疗效的关键因素。.

Keywords: Pancreatitis, acute necrotizing; Surgical indication; Surgical timing; Surgical treatment.

Publication types

  • Clinical Study

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Debridement / methods
  • Drainage / methods
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Pancreatic Pseudocyst / etiology
  • Pancreatic Pseudocyst / surgery
  • Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing / complications
  • Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing / mortality
  • Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing / surgery*
  • Retroperitoneal Space / surgery*
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Young Adult